From the original source. What made him think automakers / tech companies aren't crosschecking already? Besides... The discussions around the limits of the technology that I think are much more interesting are a) how will people respond to autonomous vehicles in traffic? b) given that "irresponsibly" is a good answer to a), how can the car respond in a safe way? c) what are the technical limits of the sensors? How can this be accounted for? My answers are respectively "eventually well", "over-cautiousness" and "redundancies". Petit touches only slightly on c) but that's about it. It's no wake-up call, not by a long shot.Petit argues that it is never too early to start thinking about security. “There are ways to solve it,” he says. “A strong system that does misbehavior detection could cross-check with other data and filter out those that aren’t plausible. But I don’t think carmakers have done it yet. This might be a good wake-up call for them.”
My educated guess is that everyone not in an autocar is going to interact aggressively with autocars. - They won't play chicken with you. Any dick move you wanna pull in traffic, the autocar is gonna roll over and take it. - You don't have to look them in the eye. That's not a fellow driver you cut off, it's a trillion-dollar corporation. - They're quicker than you and can cope with your bullshit better than your average distracted driver. Shit that would be a guaranteed fender bender is gonna be an autocar slamming on its brakes. - People with money will be driving them for a decade longer than people without money and there will be class issues. Any company launching autocars into a hybrid road system is going to assume all other drivers are not just negligent, they're likely hostile. When you start from a standpoint that every unknown vehicle is going to fuck you over if given half a chance, you end up with defensive programming.